For the dozen who actually care.....

[Guest treble charged]

I don't think they can demolish the Gardens, seeing as it's a historic site, or something like that. I think what's being done now is they're renovating it, putting in stores or condos (or something like that), and leaving a 10,000 seat hockey arena. I know, before they did all of this, they would rent the place out for private uses (a friend of mine's mom's boyfriend played a company game there, lucky fucker).

 

Of course, I could be 100% wrong. If someone who lives there knows what's going on wants to correct me, go right ahead.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

Canada must really value its venues. We lost Chicago Stadium, Boston Garden, and Soldier Field is being bastardized right now.

[Guest gthureson]

Seattle would be a fine hockey market. They've been pulling in great attendence for the WHL Thunderbirds for well over a decade. Talking 10 grand a game sometimes.

 

Milwaukee has a fairly new arena, and their minor league teams (Admirals, Lumberjacks) have always done well.)

 

The only problem is, the league has the obsession with 'Major TV markets'. Seattle and Milwaukee aren't 'Major US TV markets', and so are pretty far down the list. Despite the fact that some of those major TV markets don't try flies for attendence after the glow of a new team wears off.

[Guest nl5xsk1]

I don't think expansion makes sense ... there's too many teams as it is.

 

And if they're going to relocate teams, I'd rather they move teams back to former cities (i.e. Winnipeg or Quebec) than try new US cities. They could move Tampa Bay to Quebec, and if Pittsburgh or Buffalo ever move (like the rumors always say) they could move up to Winnipeg.

 

And I know that it will never happen because of US dollars vs. CDN dollars. But it's what I'd want.

[Guest gthureson]

It won't work because of the nature of the NHL.

 

Winnipeg doesn't have the arena or the market pull to make anybody want to pay the kind of money they'd need for local TV rights to make a go of it. They'd be another small market team on life support from year to year. Ottawa is a better market than Winnipeg and it seems they are touch and go as well as to whether they can turn a profit.

 

Quebec is in a worse situation. Not only is it a small market, but its in Northern Quebec. Nobody wants to play there except French guys. Because nobody else speaks english, its bloody cold, the taxes are brutal.

 

In both places, the local fans may be rabid, but they would be worse off than the Oilers as far as trying to sign and keep players.

 

The days of NHL moving into moderate sized Canadian cities is over. Expansion in Ottawa was an aberration. Edmonton, Calgary and the Sens are in tough, trying to keep competitive teams on the ice, but lets be honest, only the Sens have an outside chance of winning it all. Neither Calgary or Edmonton can keep a core long enough to have anything but a run to the conference finals.

 

*If* Buffalo moves, and I don't think they will, they will probably go to Portland or Seattle 'cause Paul Allen wants a team. Thats only if they go on the open market 'cause non-felonous local buyers can be found. That'd mean a team from the West moving to the East, likely Detroit.

 

Make sense to put them in with Toronto and Montreal, and in the same conference as Boston and the Rangers. It'd leave Chicago as the only original 6 team in the West, but oh well.

 

Unless the bottom really falls out of the NHL, and salaries drop according, cities like Hamilton, Winnipeg and Quebec won't see NHL teams except in exhibition play.

 

And to think, in the 80s, the Blues almost moved to Saskatoon and there was talk of expansion to Halifax. Times change.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

Maybe the NHL should contract.

 

Dallas Stars + Minnesota Wild = Minnesota North Stars

 

Carolina Hurricanes + Nashville Predators = Hartford Whalers

 

Pheonix Coyotes ---> Winnipeg Jets

 

EDIT: I just realized that if this were to happen, the North Stars would be the Minnesota Wild merged with the Dallas Stars, who were originally the Minnesota North Stars, who were created by a merger of the original '67 North Stars with the Cleveland Barons, who were originally the Oakland Seals. While we're at it, merge them with some AHL team, they'll be the Intercontinental Championship of the NHL.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

And to think, in the 80s, the Blues almost moved to Saskatoon and there was talk of expansion to Halifax. Times change.

It's really sad that Nashville, Florida, and Phoenix are BETTER hockey markets than most of Canada. Just goes to show you how taxes and a weak dollar can screw things up. Portland Flames or Orlando Oilers anyone?

[Guest gthureson]

Better markets, not neccessarily better hockey markets.

 

Edmonton still put 12000 people in the seats even when guys were getting sold off every year, and there was no chance they would make the playoffs. When they started trying again, the house was full again.

 

Calgary fans just seems to be frustrated by the treadmill the team is on. They are 'real' fans, in that if the team is sucking and obviously not going in the right direction they send the message the only way they can. They stay at home.

 

Nashville, Florida and Phoenix are 'TV markets'. Though I'd be hard pressed to find many hockey fans who would say 'Nashville vs. Florida! Yeah, lets watch that one.' However, even the American fans I talk to online know that Edmonton-Calgary is bound to be good game, and would watch it if they could, despite the fact they are 'small Canadian markets in provinces most of the US would be hard-pressed to name.'

 

Whatever.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Better markets, not neccessarily better hockey markets.

 

Edmonton still put 12000 people in the seats even when guys were getting sold off every year, and there was no chance they would make the playoffs. When they started trying again, the house was full again.

 

Calgary fans just seems to be frustrated by the treadmill the team is on. They are 'real' fans, in that if the team is sucking and obviously not going in the right direction they send the message the only way they can. They stay at home.

 

Nashville, Florida and Phoenix are 'TV markets'. Though I'd be hard pressed to find many hockey fans who would say 'Nashville vs. Florida! Yeah, lets watch that one.' However, even the American fans I talk to online know that Edmonton-Calgary is bound to be good game, and would watch it if they could, despite the fact they are 'small Canadian markets in provinces most of the US would be hard-pressed to name.'

 

Whatever.

Exactly, that's my point. It's sad that Nashville can have a more economicaly stable franchise than Winnipeg or Quebec. $$$ > Hockey interest. I'd much rather see Calgary against Edmonton, teams with actual history and meaning than a bout between a couple of expansion teams.

[Guest nl5xsk1]

As much as it got all the baseball fans crying and bitching, I think contraction would be the best thing to happen to hockey in a long, long time.

 

Florida doesn't need two teams, fold Tampa Bay and have the Panters play a limited # of games in Tampa. And fold the Mighty Ducks, I think that two teams are sufficient for California (plus, Disney doesn't seem too interested in investing in them).

 

I'd also like to see an arrangement where the cities that lost teams (Winnipeg, Quebec City, Hartford) get a limited number of games played in their city. The league could cover the revenue lost by the "Home" teams that are playing games in these cities. Again, I know it will never happen, but it would be a cool gesture to small market cities that just couldn't compete with the NYR, or Dallas, or Detroit, etc.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Contraction is a great idea. Did you know: that it's estimated that there is less than 2 million people in the WORLD playing hockey of any kind. Because of that, it is estimated that 1 out of every 3,000 is designated as NHL caliber. For baseball it's 1 in 33,000. Basically the NHL today fosters minor league caliber players in NHL uniforms.

 

My guess is if contraction were to come about, the Ducks, Panthers and Devils would most likely be on the chopping block.

[Guest Grenouille]

The Devils? I didn't know they were in any kind of financial problem, please tell.

 

Out of the 30 teams, I'd say that 4 would be a good starting point.

my choices...

 

Columbus

Atlanta

Tampa Bay

Anaheim

[Guest treble charged]

I hate the idea of contraction. Every team has some fans, no matter how few. Taking away their team means taking away that team's fans, and the NHL needs all the fans it can get.

[Guest starvenger]

Contraction is a great idea. Did you know: that it's estimated that there is less than 2 million people in the WORLD playing hockey of any kind. Because of that, it is estimated that 1 out of every 3,000 is designated as NHL caliber. For baseball it's 1 in 33,000. Basically the NHL today fosters minor league caliber players in NHL uniforms.

I'm thinking that it's actually a bit more than 2 million, but regardless the ratios are probably about right. Taking into account that hockey is a winter sport, you immediately lose a lot of the world right there. Baseball can't exactly be played year round, but it's more affordable and it's easier to find the conditions in which to play.

 

Minor league caliber players though? Yeah, I'll buy that, especially since it's an issue across all 4 major North American sports. No way is Colovaccio pushed to the NHL if there were less teams (unless Ballard was still alive and owned the Leafs).

 

Any idea of the ratio for soccer?

[Guest gthureson]

While McMullen owned the Devils, he claimed financial duress because he couldn't get a new arena built. (Nevermind they financed the Meadowlands for him to get the team from Colorado.)

 

The Devils are now owned by YankeesCorp. They have no financial worries, though Lou will still keep a tight reign on finances because that is just the way he is.

 

*IF* the league keeps with their obstruction calling, the minor leaguers will become apparent. They will be the ones who continue to take dumb penalties because they can't skate with the rest of the league or just can't grasp the concept of positioning.

 

Columbus is probably a decent city for the league to be in. Its a one-sport town happy to have their major league team.

 

If you were going to contract, and I don't think they will, the ones you'd have to consider are:

 

Anaheim: Disney isn't interested in putting money into the team. The fan base is soft. Honestly, I don't know how many Duck fans would miss them and wouldn't easily slide over to being fans of the Sharks or the Kings.

 

Tampa: One of the worst run franchises over the last ten years. They are making strides, but between them and Miami, I'd say keep the Panthers. The Panthers at least have a modicrum of history from their Stanley Cup appearance.

 

I'd say contract by two, and leave it there. Because if you want to be serious about it, and go two more, then you seriously have to consider teams like:

 

Ottawa: Early attendence problems and chronic problems being profitable would make them a prime target.

 

Calgary: Again, chronic money problems and a serious problem selling season tickets.

 

Do you want to contract and remove two Canadian teams? Not likely, but if you are going to contract on the basis of money and attendence, then you have to consider the Sens and the Flames. At least the Oilers are getting asses in the seats, keeping their finances in line and finding a way into the playoffs.

 

Atlanta is not a bad hockey city. The Flames did alright their in the 70s, it was problems with the Omni and with ownership that got them sent up to Calgary. While I wouldn't really mind removing Florida, the league probably would not want to admit a mistake, and removing both Florida teams would be just that.

 

Contraction in hockey is unlikely though.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

I really wish the Canadian fans would get more passionate about their sport and start filling seats. Hockey does not belong in Nashville and Carolina and Phoenix...it belongs in Canada and the northern U.S.

 

We're cursed with these stupid team names like the Minnesota Wild and the Pheonix Coyotes. Come on. When I think hockey, I think "everything but a coyote." People in these "small markets" need to get passionate and compensate for being a smaller town. The Jets, Whalers, and Nortdiques should've been better supported. If hockey can get more popular and draw in more fans, maybe these superior hockey towns can get teams back.

 

 

And last but not least, reform the North Stars!!! The only real way that can be gone about is if the NHL would realize the oversaturation and authorize a Dallas/Minnesota merger not unlike the original Bloomington/Cleveland(Oakland) merger.

[Guest gthureson]

This is going to sound stupid....but cities with passionate fans don't show up like sheep every night when their team sucks.

 

The Whalers were beloved by their city. Really. They just stopped packing the place when the team started to suck. Jets fans were out there through thick and thin...likely 'cause there ain't much else to do in Winnipeg. Quebec fans only really dwindled during the 'sucking donkey balls' years, and who can blame them? Those teams were ugly to watch.

 

Even Habs fan stopped showing up every night when they were missing the playoffs and sucking ass.

 

Don't ask me why, but thats just the way it is. Alot of hockey fans are of the opinion, 'At least show me you are trying to be good, and I'll show up.'

 

They'll support weak teams that are drafting well, giving the kids their chance, and making smart trades. They stay away when it looks like owners just don't give a shit, or management wouldn't know how to put together a good team. Because that is the way you let them know. 5000 empty seats tells ownership that they had best find a way to start winning.

 

Yeah, its sounds like, 'Fairweather fans'. But I present Exhibit A, the Toronto Maple Leafs, from 1979 or so to 1990. They did nothing to improve the team. It seemed like they weren't even trying that hard. Why? Because it didn't matter how many games they lost, the Gardens was packed every night. They could lose 10-0 every game and every seat would still be sold. There was no reason to improve.

 

Exhibit B: The Habs. They started to suck, empty seats started showing up. The Habs made an effort to improve, and they came back. Same thing in Edmonton. The lean years in the mid 90s saw thin crowds (though ones Carolina would kill for most nights). They improved, started making the playoffs, the fans came back.

 

Exhibit C: The most drastic was the Penguins in the 80s. They were getting crowds of 4000 and 5000 a night, and were bankrupt (sound familiar.) Then they drafted Mario, and while they still sucked, they didn't suck nearly as much, and the crowds returned. Then they won a couple of Cups.

 

Finally, there will not be a Dallas/Minnesota merger. Dallas is a successful franchise. They are run well, get people in the seats and are solid. The NHL would likely prefer to merge them into one Dallas franchise, not into a Minnesota one.

 

And despite the fact I wish they were still in Winnipeg, I like Phoenix. They are building the kind of team I'd like to watch, so I have no harsh words for them.

 

I guess my ultimate point is: Fans have every right to let ownership know they suck by not showing up.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

In regard to the Dallas/Minnesota merger:

If the Wild and Stars merged, you could always create a new expansion team to take the place of the Stars. The Stars were a truly Minnesotan team, and by merging them with the Wild, the North Stars could be reinstated, bringing back integrity, history, and familiarity to the Minneapolis franchise which the Wild lacks. Of course, one could argue that Dallas now lost the lineage it had acquired over the last 10-or-so years, but such is the opportunity cost of restoring a truer hockey market, one supposes.

 

This is a franchise relocation and reorganization plan I came up with a few months ago in a little fantasy-booking project:

 

Minnesota North Stars are reformed by merger of Dallas Stars and Minnesota Wild.

Buffalo Sabres are sold and moved to Seattle.

Carolina Hurricanes relocate and are reformed as the Hartford Whalers.

Pheonix Coyotes relocate and are reformed as the Winnipeg Jets.

Mighty Ducks of Anaheim relocate and are renamed the Dallas Crusaders.

Quebec Nordiques are reformed as an expansion team to fill the gap left by the merger.

[Guest gthureson]

So what you are saying is:

 

1) Take a successful and winning team out of Dallas and put it into Minnesota.

 

2) Move the Sabres to Seattle, when all they need is solvent ownership to remain to remain in Buffalo.

 

3) Move the Hurricanes back to Hartford, even though Hartford still does not have a new arena, and thus could not compete because they don't have the cash cow luxury boxes to sell.

 

4) Move Phoenix back to Winnipeg where they will die another slow, lonely death because they also don't have a new arena, and the market is TV death.

 

5) Give Dallas a crappy team in return.

 

6) Expand into Quebec, where the team could languish at the bottom of the payroll scale and eventually move somewhere else again.

 

Now, in a fantasy situation where every city can compete financially, some of it might make sense.

 

In reality, Winnipeg, Hartford and Quebec stand no chance at making a go of professional hockey anymore. The cities/province/state don't want to fund a new arena. No new arena = not enough revenue to finance a team. And Quebec and Winnipeg, despite the strong nostalgia I have for those teams, truly are TV death for trying to get a decent TV deal out of ESPN/Fox/ABC whomever. And that is why the NHL has expanded to Florida, Arizona, Texas. To get into these TV markets to try and score some kind of lucrative deal. It won't happen, of course, because what I realize but the league doesn't is that professional hockey is a niche market that will only ever be beloved by a small segment of the market, and will always be number 4 on the so-called Big 4. Which is really the Big 3 + the NHL.

 

And you need to accept that the North Stars are gone. Forever. You have a new team that is drafting well, and should be decent. Their jerseys look okay, and Wild isn't nearly as bad as Lightning, Mighty Ducks or Bluejackets.

 

After eliminating the cities that should not have NHL teams again (mainly because of money reasons. As much as I liked the Jets and Nordiques, I don't want teams there just to have teams there. I don't want two more teams that will sit at the bottom of payroll and not be able to build a good team and keep it.), and removing the fantasy of having the North Stars back, what we are left with is:

 

Talk Disney into selling the Ducks to Paul Allen and he can move them to either Seattle or Portland. Probably Portland, because Seattle is likely in Vancouver's territory, and they could nix it if they wanted to, and they likely would, just like Toronto and Buffalo always spiked an NHL team going into Hamilton.

 

Which would be an improvement. The American North-West has supported Western Hockey League Jr. A quite well, so I think an NHL team could make a go of it, and as long as Allen is willing to give them a decent budget, they could have a good team in a good region.

 

I know yours was a fantasy booking project, but occassionally reality has to impede on fantasy sometimes, and unless a hard cap is brought in (unlikely, the NHLPA is pretty strong, and it wouldn't suprise me to see the NHL lose an entire season or two if they decided to lock them out until they got a hard cap), then medium sized Canadian cities can't compete.

 

But Anaheim to Portland/Seattle I could definately go for.

 

If only there were a viable city to move the Lightning to.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

Yeah, it's all fantasy, true. It's fun to screw around and think of maybe seeing the North Stars back or hearing Brass Bonanza.

 

Hockey is a niche sport, true. There's no way it'll reach football or baseball levels in the U.S. The Chicago Blackhawks don't even have home game coverage, for crying out loud.

 

 

So...yeah. Whatever. Go Blackhawks. Bring back the North Stars...whoo.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

I really wish the Canadian fans would get more passionate about their sport and start filling seats. Hockey does not belong in Nashville and Carolina and Phoenix...it belongs in Canada and the northern U.S.

 

We're cursed with these stupid team names like the Minnesota Wild and the Pheonix Coyotes. Come on. When I think hockey, I think "everything but a coyote." People in these "small markets" need to get passionate and compensate for being a smaller town.

It's not that the Canadian fans aren't passionate about their teams, they just can't afford to support them most likely because of the tax rate. There's a vicious cycle going on up there. Tickets are expensive because the Canadian teams have to compete with the U.S $ which is over 30 cents stronger. Because of the lack of revenue, the Canadian teams not in Montreal and Toronto have to go cheap on the payroll. A cheap payroll produces less stars and fewer stars mean less action/wins. Less action/wins mean less fan interest and less revenue. The dilema is even stronger when you take into account that only the Flames can be considered playoff pretenders. Even with good teams, the Oilers and Sens ( an eastern conference power) still are on thin ice while the Predators putt along with stability. Something is seriously wrong up north.

 

EDIT: I can't think of anything I hate more than the Coyotes. Their uniforms, the name, their arena, it all smacks of the minor leauges. (This coming from a Shark fan mind you, the people that brought teal and the "aggressive logo" into the world.)

[Guest starvenger]

Yeah, its sounds like, 'Fairweather fans'. But I present Exhibit A, the Toronto Maple Leafs, from 1979 or so to 1990. They did nothing to improve the team. It seemed like they weren't even trying that hard. Why? Because it didn't matter how many games they lost, the Gardens was packed every night. They could lose 10-0 every game and every seat would still be sold. There was no reason to improve.

Coincidentally, Harold Ballard owned the team at the time. He did what he wanted to , and didn't give a fuck what anyone else thought. Unfortunately what he wanted to do was meddle around with the Leafs, and do it at a bargain price. Remember that this is the guy that simplified the Leafs logo simply because it was quicker and easier (and therefore cheaper) to sew onto a hockey sweater.

 

Right now Toronto is a competitive team despite the fact that they could sell out the ACC every night. Which is good for everyone involved. Now if they'd just win a bloody Cup...

[Guest gthureson]

Well, remember back when Gretzky was free agent after finishing the season in St. Louis?

 

Leafs fans wanted him to sign. Gretzky wanted to close out his career with the Leafs, and was willing to do so at a bargain price.

 

What was Steve Stavros response?

 

"Will he put anymore asses in seats?"

 

And that was that.

 

My favorite Ballard story was that he held out putting names on the backs of jerseys in Toronto for a long time because, "If you put names on the jerseys, nobody has a reason to buy a program."

 

That and the fact that he banned Russians from Maple Leaf gardens, including the Moscow Circus 'cause he wasn't going to 'support Communism in any way, shape or form.'

 

I loved Harold Ballard. That man was a character.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

The simple Toronto Maple Leafs logo is so awesome though, good for him. Otherwise he's an ass.

[Guest treble charged]

Well, remember back when Gretzky was free agent after finishing the season in St. Louis?

 

Leafs fans wanted him to sign. Gretzky wanted to close out his career with the Leafs, and was willing to do so at a bargain price.

 

What was Steve Stavros response?

 

"Will he put anymore asses in seats?"

 

And that was that.

Cliff Fletcher had a deal all worked out with Gretzky, too, but couldn't get Stavros to OK the deal.

 

The maddening thing is, this is only a year or two before the Leafs started going after big name free agents (Joesph and Thomas signed either one or two years later), and became a good team, while Gretzky finished his career playing on a crappy, non-playoff team, even though he was still a very good player.

[Guest starvenger]

Well, it doesn't matter now, because here in the 2002-2003 season, we've got TOM FUCKING FITZGERALD!!! [/sarcasm]

 

Anyways I got to see Habs-Leafs LIVE at Le Centre Bell and it ROCKED!! It was loud for the Toronto goals, even LOUDER for the Habs goals, and quite fast paced. Oh and the netting doesn't impede your view at all.

[Guest treble charged]

Habs/Leafs games live are AWESOME. I saw one at the Forum a good 10 years ago, and it was one of the most memorable sporting moments of my life. I was 8 rows behind the net, and Hall of Famer Dickie Moore paid for my seat (his brother was my dad's hockey coach in university). The game ended in a 3-3 tie, and I remember that both the back-up goalies (J.C. Bergeron [sp?] and Jeff Reese) started.

 

Awesome experience.